I'm going to take half of Chloe's candy tonight [and] give it to some kid who sat at home. It's never to [sic] early to teach her about socialism.Let's think about exactly what the lesson is supposed to be here: trick-or-treating is OK, a shining example of what capitalism is supposed to be all about, but sharing with "a kid who sat at home" is socialism. Never mind why the kid who sat at home did so. No possibility that the kid was sick, or disabled, or caring for a relative, or doing their homework, or forbidden from participating by their parents. Nope, the only possible reason for any kid not seizing the initiative on Halloween is laziness and the anticipation of a government handout.
But it's even worse than that. Not only is sharing "socialist" and therefore bad, but trick-or-treating itself is good, almost the ideal of capitalism. But take a moment to think about what the phrase "trick-or-treat" actually means: it means, "Give me some candy or I will vandalize your home." Halloween, when held up as a life lesson, is a training ground for budding mafiosos running protection rackets, which is not so far removed from how Donald Trump pére made a lot of his money. So it's actually not surprising at all that DTJr thinks that trick-or-treating is a fine example of capitalistic initiative. It has obviously worked for him.
Post a Comment